We had the pleasure of examining the thought-provoking meta-analysis in Choi et al’s study published in Surgery. 1 The study evaluated treatment modalities for solitary, small (
3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma, and we commend the authors for their innovative approach to this vital clinical matter. Nonetheless, we have a few concerns that arise from the statistical analyses presented in the article. First, it would be helpful if the authors could kindly elucidate the rationale behind the inclusion and exclusion criteria used in selecting studies for the meta-analysis. This would ensure that the included studies accurately represent the broader literature on treatment modalities for solitary, small (≤3 cm) hepatocellular carcinoma and minimize potential biases.